The state Supreme Court upheld a law making it easier for legal guardians to adopt children, saying youngsters need a stable home and a guardian doesn't have to prove that the child's biological parents are unfit.
The case involved children placed with guardians at a family member's request, usually because the parents can't care for them. If parents object, a judge must decide whether parental custody would be harmful to the child.
A 2004 state law allows a guardian to adopt a child after two years if a judge agrees. Before the law was passed, guardians could adopt only if the parents had abandoned the child, committed a crime showing unfitness or were mentally ill.
In upholding the new law, the court unanimously rejected a Yolo County woman's challenge to her 5-year-old daughter's adoption by guardians who had taken care of her for 3 1/2 years.
"After years of guardianship, the child has a fully developed interest in a stable, continuing and permanent placement with a fully committed caregiver," the court said.
Kimball Sargeant, lawyer for the Yolo County woman, argued that the law is unconstitutional because it removes rights from a parent without proof that the parent is unfit.
Full Article and Source:
California court upholds guardians' adoptions
More information:
California Supreme Court bolsters guardians' right to adopt
High court makes it easier for guardians to adopt children
The case involved children placed with guardians at a family member's request, usually because the parents can't care for them. If parents object, a judge must decide whether parental custody would be harmful to the child.
A 2004 state law allows a guardian to adopt a child after two years if a judge agrees. Before the law was passed, guardians could adopt only if the parents had abandoned the child, committed a crime showing unfitness or were mentally ill.
In upholding the new law, the court unanimously rejected a Yolo County woman's challenge to her 5-year-old daughter's adoption by guardians who had taken care of her for 3 1/2 years.
"After years of guardianship, the child has a fully developed interest in a stable, continuing and permanent placement with a fully committed caregiver," the court said.
Kimball Sargeant, lawyer for the Yolo County woman, argued that the law is unconstitutional because it removes rights from a parent without proof that the parent is unfit.
Full Article and Source:
California court upholds guardians' adoptions
More information:
California Supreme Court bolsters guardians' right to adopt
High court makes it easier for guardians to adopt children
I don't know how to feel about this. The sentiment is correct - it should all be about finding the children a good home.
ReplyDeleteBut, it might also be used as a tool to take kids away from their homes in the same name of "protection" the elderly suffer from.
I know how I feel about this. Atty. Seargent is correct. It is unconstitutional. It is Constitution non compliance. The reason there's a trial is to present evidence, so that a judge (or jury) can make an INFORMED decision. If there's no evidence of abuse, wrong doing, the parents rights have been violated. The children are deprived, of parental affection, support. That's the law.
ReplyDeleteThis is what comes from judicial "discretion." This is what comes from judge's usurping authority of the legislature.
It's for money for the state!!
ReplyDelete